CC: Rivals mods seem to be expecting some changes

Submitted by Magnus on December 24th, 2010 at 12:58 PM

The mods over at Rivals posted an Inside the Fort (super-premium info) article today.  And while I won't quote any exact information because of its premium nature, it seemed to be hinting at some big things going on in Ann Arbor:

- It sounds like an NFL coach plans to be in Ann Arbor next year (they wouldn't say whether it's a head coach or a coordinator)

- It sounds like there might be some academic ineligibility for the bowl game

- From my interpretation, it sounds like they believe Rodriguez will be here next year.

As you might expect, there's a lot of reading between the lines to be done.  So take this for what it's worth.

Have a good holiday, everyone!

Comments

ken725

December 24th, 2010 at 2:19 PM ^

Maybe it is Bill Sheridan who is currently in the inside linebacker coach for the Miami Dolphins.  He obviously has some ties through his current employer and his son.  What if it was a package deal with him and Nick.  Nick would come back to be one of those graduate assistant coaches.  

allezbleu

December 24th, 2010 at 2:42 PM ^

but I know a lot of Giants fans who thought he was a terrible DC and I totally agree.

the giants defense regressed tremendously under him despite all the talent they had. he took a pressure-based, man-to-man defense under steve spagnuolo with all that pass rush talent they had (umenyiora, tuck, kiwanuka, pierre-paul, cofield) and made them into a dropback zone coverage defense.

the results were disastrous and he was let go after a year. the father-son connection or not, i would be very disappointed if he were hired. i would rather get a proven, or even unproven guy rather than a guy who failed spectacularly in his only try...

JT4104

December 24th, 2010 at 1:03 PM ^

Looking at NFL coaches that might have a michigan tie-in....brings us back to Turgo again. Have to imagine the changes on the staff will be strictly on the D side of the ball.

 

Hopefully it's not a lot of kids who are having academic problems.

All in all the bowl cant get here fast enough and getting all this CC crap behind us will be nice.

08mms

December 24th, 2010 at 2:04 PM ^

I'd imagine the friendship with RRod probably counts more than the Michigan Man thing in the search unless DB is using his magic to pull someone we might not otherwise get.

Logan88

December 24th, 2010 at 1:24 PM ^

I'm confused as to why so many posters are quick to villify GERG for the defensive woes and at the same time complain about a) RR's "interference" on the defensive side of the ball (e.g. forcing the 3-3-5) and b) the youth/inexperience in the defensive personnel.

Which is it? Is the defense bad because of GERG or is it bad because of youth/RR's meddling? If it is the latter, then why should GERG get the axe?

The other thing I find confusing is that many posters are advocating ANOTHER change in defensive co-ordinator when many of those same posters have proclaimed that the constant changes in DC's/defenses is a major contributor to the defensive woes.

There just seems to be a lot of inconsistency/logic errors in the complaints re: the defense.

Magnus

December 24th, 2010 at 1:32 PM ^

I really don't think changing defensive coordinators is that big of a deal.  It has been blown out of proportion at Michigan over the past few years.  Defenses often improve when a new coordinator comes to town.

I'm certainly annoyed that Rodriguez has meddled in the defense as much as he has, but I don't think it's so much that Greg Robinson is a horrible coach/coordinator...

...it's more that Greg Robinson doesn't fit what Rodriguez wants, so it's pointless to keep Robinson around.

Ziff72

December 24th, 2010 at 1:38 PM ^

Do we really have evidence he is meddling in the defense?   Other than the supposed overthrow of Schaefer at Purdue what evidence do we have of this?   From everything we see RR handles the offens and Gerg handles the defense and if there is a problem(lots this year) RR talks with Gerg.

NOLA Wolverine

December 24th, 2010 at 1:49 PM ^

Gerg going to the 3-3-5 isn't enough evidence for you? And I would say completely hijacking your coordinators scheme at the end of the season to put in a defense that is almost unique to Rich Rodriguez coached teams was evidence enough that he does a lot more on defense than we think. 

briangoblue

December 24th, 2010 at 1:53 PM ^

about position coach changes (Gibson, for example)? Would that be more impactful than a D coordinator change, or do you think the D coordinator change doesn't make as much difference because the position coaches would stay the same? If the D coordinator brought his own staff would he be capable of making a more sweeping difference?

tenerson

December 24th, 2010 at 3:37 PM ^

I agree with you and it will be kind of sad  to read the "Look what happens when GERG isn't here" posts next year. It won't matter who the DC is next year. The defense is going to get better under any coordinator simply because we probably won't be running a bunch of freshman or at least highly inexperienced players out there not to mention we get our best two cornerbacks back next year.

PIJER

December 24th, 2010 at 11:50 PM ^

It's not only the inexperience, but the defense has been alligned incorrectly on many of the big plays that they gave up. It's one thing to have young players, but a good coordinator should at least have them in good positions to make plays. Too many times this year that wasn't the case. Any time you have your linebackers line up 3 yards off the ball you are asking for trouble.

switch26

December 24th, 2010 at 1:03 PM ^

thanks for the info magnus..

 

This makes me think about what RR said in an article several wks ago.  He mentioned how he himself has been taking notes and grading his assistants coaches this past year and will evaluate them at the end of the year similiar to Brandons decision.  Should be interesting to hear if there is truth to this

 

If there is indeed truth to an NFL coach of some kind coming to mich and RR staying, i would obviously expect greg robinson to be gone, because someone has to take the fall if it isn't RR who goes

switch26

December 24th, 2010 at 2:03 PM ^

He's also a coach who has had a history of terrible Defenses everywhere he has gone, other than Texas(a team loaded with nfl talent) and the bronco's where he won a superbowl..with again incredibly talented team.. 

Everywhere else he has been his defensive stats have not been very good.  Someone posted them all on here a while back and it was alarming

 

You ask why does he have to be the scape goat?  Hmm.. well maybe you didn't watch our defense this year..  I know we had young talent, injured players and gerg was running a system he has never run before..  But i fail to believe that there isn't a D coordinator out there that couldn't make our guys play with more fire, and more desire..

dahblue

December 24th, 2010 at 3:30 PM ^

Of course I watched our defense!  That's why I think it's unfair to scapegoat GERG (as Shaffer was scapegoated before).  The defense is bad because RR neglected it.  We have unrivaled attrition, losing 32% of defensive commits during the RR-era.  RR insisted on a scheme and then stepped away from that side of the ball.  The defense is a mess for a number of reasons.  Youth and injury and two reasons.  RR is another.

Mitch Cumstein

December 25th, 2010 at 8:27 AM ^

I don't know why people are so defensive of criticism of RR (like in this post), yet so willing to throw GERG under the bus.  What proof does anyone have that RR didn't and that its ALL GERG's fault?  I'm pretty sure the head coach is responsible for the team's performance (on both sides of the ball), so even if you want to completely blame GERG, RR still holds some responsibility for hiring him. 

dahblue

December 25th, 2010 at 12:03 PM ^

You're talking about the coach who, after realizing that his defense sucked, publicly said that he'd spend "more time" with the defense, "maybe fifteen minutes", right?  The guy who had a total of 9 defensive recruits stick with the program through his first two years?  When the coach admits that he doesn't spend time with the defense, inside info isn't needed.

Kal

December 24th, 2010 at 4:36 PM ^

Using that's what she said when the entire context of what you were replying to was already intended to be sexual kind of defeats the purpose of using it. 

OMG Shirtless

December 24th, 2010 at 1:09 PM ^

That's not how the majority of Rivals posters interpreted the RR info, but obviously they left a lot of room for interpretation.

I would, however, pay good money to watch the staff of TheWolverine, GoBlueWolverine, and GBMWolverine participate in a cage match to the death. They all seem to royally despise each other.

GRWolverineFan

December 24th, 2010 at 2:05 PM ^

IMHO it is because no one truly knows what is going to happen and everyone is just throwing out their opinions with their own particular biases.  TheWolverine doesn't like RR because they don't have the same level of inside access like they did with Carr.  GBW likes RR because they have more inside info than ever with their carry-over insider. GBMW dislikes anything to do with GBW (and grammar/spelling) because their writers got banned by the Beav.